[CornFed]

[quote author=CornFed link=topic=10167.msg91900#msg91900 date=1404411640]
http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles...01155.html

That's some hilarious begging the question. If CA's businesses are fleeing in droves and the state needs to be rescued, why is its economy doing so well?


[/quote]


Begging the Question is a fallacy in which the premises include the claim that the conclusion is true or (directly or indirectly) assume that the conclusion is true. This sort of "reasoning" typically has the following form.

Premises in which the truth of the conclusion is claimed or the truth of the conclusion is assumed (either directly or indirectly).
Claim C (the conclusion) is true.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because simply assuming that the conclusion is true (directly or indirectly) in the premises does not constitute evidence for that conclusion. Obviously, simply assuming a claim is true does not serve as evidence for that claim. This is especially clear in particularly blatant cases: "X is true. The evidence for this claim is that X is true."

Some cases of question begging are fairly blatant, while others can be extremely subtle.

Not sure the article was making any point that the economy is currently doing badly.  It was citing data indicating the state's ranking in a variety of rankings regarding the attractiveness of doing business there.  I would think that continued underperformance in these areas compared to other states will ultimately affect the performance of California's economy

[CornFed]

[quote author=CornFed link=topic=10167.msg91900#msg91900 date=1404411640]
http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles...01155.html

That's some hilarious begging the question. If CA's businesses are fleeing in droves and the state needs to be rescued, why is its economy doing so well?


[/quote]


Begging the Question is a fallacy in which the premises include the claim that the conclusion is true or (directly or indirectly) assume that the conclusion is true. This sort of "reasoning" typically has the following form.

Premises in which the truth of the conclusion is claimed or the truth of the conclusion is assumed (either directly or indirectly).
Claim C (the conclusion) is true.
This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because simply assuming that the conclusion is true (directly or indirectly) in the premises does not constitute evidence for that conclusion. Obviously, simply assuming a claim is true does not serve as evidence for that claim. This is especially clear in particularly blatant cases: "X is true. The evidence for this claim is that X is true."

Some cases of question begging are fairly blatant, while others can be extremely subtle.

Not sure the article was making any point that the economy is currently doing badly.  It was citing data indicating the state's ranking in a variety of rankings regarding the attractiveness of doing business there.  I would think that continued underperformance in these areas compared to other states will ultimately affect the performance of California's economy